Leica Colour in Lightroom

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There are other aspects of the embedded profile, and of Adobe standard, that I don't like - embedded may be correct, but I prefer my own.

But finding agreement on the correct colour among camera fans is a game only for the persevering.

 

This is also why specific preset options can also be beneficial....targeted changes rather than global profile, which may need tweaking anyway based on a given image.

 

BTW, I'm surprised Jaap didn't respond to Ralph that he's gone on Safari every year for about 30 years now....not just back to back. 

 

Jeff

Edited August 5, 2016 by Jeff S

[ralphh]

Clearly Jaap can spot a joke when he sees one

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jrp]

Actually, the embedded profile is a very crude one, essentially just for white balance.

[ralphh]

So Adobe are actively screwing up my greens, rather than Leica cunningly fixing IR issues? I know one profile can't cover everything, but grass in daylight seems like a base case scenario, not an obscure niche use Adobe wouldn't expect.

 

Are you sure your info is current- it could have got more sophisticated with firmware updates

 

(Genuine questions - I know that could sound rhetorical and stroppy in text with no tone of voice)

Edited August 5, 2016 by ralphh

[jaapv]

Leica won't be fixing IR issues in a hurry, cunningly or not. The short register distance, dictated by their determination to ensure retrocompatability of their camera to as many lenses as possible, makes impossible to provide cover glass for their sensors that is thick enough to be totally IR opaque. In fact, it is quite a feat that they filter IR as well as they do.

[ralphh]

Jaap, that seems a bizarre misunderstanding of my post. Either the yellow is not an IR issue, ie it's an Adobe profile issue, or if it is IR, the Leica profile corrects it, at least for grass on a sunny day in Europe - which was the whole point of this thread. I wasn't talking about cover glass at all.

Edited August 6, 2016 by ralphh

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So Adobe are actively screwing up my greens, rather than Leica cunningly fixing IR issues? I know one profile can't cover everything, but grass in daylight seems like a base case scenario, not an obscure niche use Adobe wouldn't expect.

 

Are you sure your info is current- it could have got more sophisticated with firmware updates

 

(Genuine questions - I know that could sound rhetorical and stroppy in text with no tone of voice)

With the SL, the original embedded profile and Adobe standard were poor, IMO, so I made my own. Later, both improved considerably, and I now use the Adobe Standard. So, yes, they do change. But I still use my own custom profile for the M.

[ralphh]

Cool, perhaps I will invest some time in doing similar.  I don't want to use my colorchecker to create it, but I may come up with something I like.  Knowing me it would end up looking a lot like Fuji Pro 400H or Portra 160

 

It's certainly seems to targeting a very very narrow band of yellow-green though, and making it green - I have not yet seen anything that should be yellow turn out green and I don't know if I could be that targeted with the LR sliders (admittedly I have not tried! ).  And I'm certainly not going to start making localised adjustments to plants in every photo i take outdoors in strong sunshine - just the idea of that makes me want to go watch paint dry  I could do it now and then for 'that' photo, but not for any volume of pictures.

 

edit: amazing what you find when you actually try things out.  So shooting my color checker, it looks like the profile mainly affects a specific yellow-green (second row from the bottom, third in from the left)

 

Standard first, embedded second:

 

Grass 'swatches' for comparison below, same order

 

Looking at the color checker with my eyes... well i'd say the 'truth' is halfway between the two.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 6, 2016 by ralphh

[jaapv]

Jaap, that seems a bizarre misunderstanding of my post. Either the yellow is not an IR issue, ie it's an Adobe profile issue, or if it is IR, the Leica profile corrects it, at least for grass on a sunny day in Europe - which was the whole point of this thread. I wasn't talking about cover glass at all.

Ah! I thought you were addressing the cause of the contamination vs. the profile.

[ralphh]

nah.   No worried tho - you have so many threads to read, keep track of and moderate at the same time... honestly I don't know how you do it - I can't be involved in more than 3 conversations at the same time before I loose track!

 

so, anyway, using the wonders of photoshop, I have created a combined Standard / Embedded colorchecker photo.  Embedded is on the right of each swatch.  Note i've turned the colorchecker back the right way up, so that yellow-green patch is now second row to the top.  It may just be coincidence, but I have to believe that Leica was attempting to fix the colour of IR'd grass with this profile.

 

 

Interestingly, the two skintone patches (bottom left) seem basically identical -- which is nice

 

Pinks, purples, reds and oranges mostly look the same or very similar.

 

There is a lot more difference in some of the the blues than I would have supposed - I've not noticed any funny looking blues with either profile, but perhaps the colour of sky and water, being rather valuable anyway can stand a bit more leeway before looking strange.  

 

Or the fact that the sky is always grey here anyway means I never actually photograph anything blue!!

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 6, 2016 by ralphh

[Jeff S]

  And I'm certainly not going to start making localised adjustments to plants in every photo i take outdoors in strong sunshine - just the idea of that makes me want to go watch paint dry  I could do it now and then for 'that' photo, but not for any volume of pictures.

 

 

Maybe not for your yellow grass (if you shoot landscapes daily), but that's where presets can be useful, for less frequent but not uncommon situations....these can always be used in conjunction with custom profiles as needed.  I keep a colorchecker handy, and keep a list of presets in LR to quickly get close for most any pic (including skin tones, etc). The fine tuning can be reserved for print worthy pics.

 

Congrats for actually trying things for yourself....always my advice.  

 

Jeff

Edited August 6, 2016 by Jeff S

[ramarren]

hmm. Personally I find the 'embedded' profiles in most of my Leica cameras produce colors that are oversaturated and cartoonish. The Adobe calibration produces more neutral colors to my eye. That said, I have several different camera calibration profiles that I use, as well as several different standard presets, and rarely look for any "Leica" color—I process my photos so that they're pleasing to my eye, with whatever camera I'm using. 

[LocalHero1953]

 

 

edit: amazing what you find when you actually try things out.  So shooting my color checker, it looks like the profile mainly affects a specific yellow-green (second row from the bottom, third in from the left)

 

Standard first, embedded second:

 

What lighting did you shoot this under? The same sunlight as your grass samples?

[LocalHero1953]

 

Pinks, purples, reds and oranges mostly look the same or very similar.

 

There is a lot more difference in some of the the blues than I would have supposed - I've not noticed any funny looking blues with either profile, but perhaps the colour of sky and water, being rather valuable anyway can stand a bit more leeway before looking strange.  

 

Or the fact that the sky is always grey here anyway means I never actually photograph anything blue!!

My custom profile produces better blues than Embedded or Adobe Standard IMO, one of the reasons I use it.

[ralphh]

What lighting did you shoot this under? The same sunlight as your grass samples?

Nope, was natural light too, but indoors. I won't be creating a custom profile from it. Just wanted a more scientific look at the difference between Leica and Adobe.

[jrp]

I have also rolled my own profile (for the SL) using DCamProf, which is better than the XRite software or Adobe's profile editor because it generates a profile that takes account of brightness as well as colour.

 

The highly saturated blues (typical of city lights at night, etc) are tricky: you can have accuracy, or smooth colour transitions, but not both.

 

Anyway, I sometimes use the DCamProf profile, as it is less contrasty than the Adobe Standard one and has some tweaks that make greenery pop, etc.

 

But for 80-90% of my pics the Adobe profile is enough. The built-in profile is not really a profile: it just makes a linear while balance adjustment, to which default Adobe treatment (as opposed to a real profile such as the Adobe Standard) is then applied.

 

My profile is here https://www.dropbox.com/s/uc3kjnhdmoph5fj/naturalV3%2B.dcp?dl=0 if anyone wants to play, but the Adobe Standard is, as I say, fine. I don't think that they have fiddled my with the colours in 2.0+ of the SL firmware, but who knows.

[ralphh]

I find that very bizarre if it's true, because if so then the Adobe profile has a serious problem with a normal subject in normal light - if embedded is just a WB adjustment, then the sensor is producing a color that is about right for grass and Adobe is making it yellow. IR seems a much more likely cause, but if the profile is that bad, then even more reason not to use it. I may have a play with creating my own based off the embedded one.

Edited August 7, 2016 by ralphh

[jrp]

All that the embedded profile does is give an approximate RGB values that reflect the fact that the raw red, green and blue pixels actually contain some adjacent colour information.

 

When you apply the default S curve to that raw data, the saturation increases.

[ralphh]

Fair enough, good to know - a profile that basic sounds like a good starting point. Where are you getting this info out of curiosity?

Edited August 7, 2016 by ralphh

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jrp]

There are tools such as dcptool and dcamprof that allow you to decode DCP profiles, so that you can see what's in them.